• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Knowledge Technology & Policy >Trust and Justice in Big Data Analytics: Bringing the Philosophical Literature on Trust to Bear on the Ethics of Consent
【24h】

Trust and Justice in Big Data Analytics: Bringing the Philosophical Literature on Trust to Bear on the Ethics of Consent

机译：大数据分析中的信任与正义：将关于信任的哲学文献带入同意伦理

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Much bioethical literature and policy guidances for big data analytics in biomedical research emphasize the importance of trust. It is essential that potential participants trust so they will allow their data to be used to further research. However, comparatively, little guidance is offered as to what trustworthy oversight mechanisms are, or how policy should support them, as data are collected, shared, and used. Generally, "trust" is not characterized well enough, or meaningfully enough, for the term to be systematically applied in policy development. Yet points made in the philosophical literature on trust can help. They allow us, not only to better distinguish the different ways the term "trust" may be interpreted, but also to better determine how different approaches to trust can align with policy and governance-in what ways they may relate to key bioethical concepts and related laws, and in what ways they can help to balance individual and group interests in data sharing. This article draws from the philosophical literature on trust to identify a relationship among consent, trust, and justice. Specifically, parallels are drawn between "character-trustworthiness" and "natural justice," a set of widely held legal safeguards intended to ensure decision-makers follow a pattern of procedural fairness which protects the rights of the individual and thereby maintains public confidence in the decision-making process. Relevance to traditional bioethical principles, established laws, and consent procedures are addressed throughout. In conclusion, policy actions are suggested.
机译：有关生物医学研究中大数据分析的许多生物伦理文献和政策指南都强调了信任的重要性。潜在参与者必须信任，这是至关重要的，因此他们将允许将其数据用于进一步的研究。但是，相对而言，在收集，共享和使用数据时，关于什么是可信赖的监督机制或政策应如何支持它们，几乎没有提供指导。通常，“信任”的特征不足以使该术语在政策制定中得到系统地应用。然而，哲学文献中关于信任的观点是有帮助的。它们不仅使我们能够更好地区分“信任”一词的不同解释方式，而且使我们能够更好地确定不同的信任方式如何与政策和治理保持一致-它们可能与关键的生物伦理学概念相关联以及相关法律，以及它们以什么方式可以帮助平衡个人和团体在数据共享方面的利益。本文借鉴有关信任的哲学文献，以识别同意，信任和正义之间的关系。具体来说，在“字符信任”和“自然公正”之间有相似之处，这是一套广泛使用的法律保障措施，旨在确保决策者遵循一种程序公正的模式，以保护个人权利并从而维护公众对决策过程的信心。与传统生物伦理原则，既定法律和同意程序的相关性贯穿始终。总之，建议采取政策措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号